Comments on: High Court paves way for fresh WA Senate electionhttp://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/02/18/high-court-paves-way-for-fresh-wa-senate-election/
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on EarthTue, 03 Mar 2015 18:40:43 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1By: Outsiderhttp://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/02/18/high-court-paves-way-for-fresh-wa-senate-election/comment-page-2/#comment-1916462
OutsiderFri, 21 Feb 2014 21:00:10 +0000http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=19858#comment-1916462I have now had the chance to peruse the transcript from Thursday's proceedings before Hayne J. The only matter of substance dealt with related to costs. As foreseen by Pedant, the Commonwealth was ordered to pay the costs of all parties.I have now had the chance to peruse the transcript from Thursday’s proceedings before Hayne J. The only matter of substance dealt with related to costs. As foreseen by Pedant, the Commonwealth was ordered to pay the costs of all parties.
]]>By: Arrnea Stormbringerhttp://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/02/18/high-court-paves-way-for-fresh-wa-senate-election/comment-page-2/#comment-1914947
Arrnea StormbringerWed, 19 Feb 2014 11:40:33 +0000http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=19858#comment-1914947@Outsider 48
This "mysterious Mr Mead" is the ALP state secretary in WA.@Outsider 48

This “mysterious Mr Mead” is the ALP state secretary in WA.

]]>By: Graemehttp://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/02/18/high-court-paves-way-for-fresh-wa-senate-election/comment-page-2/#comment-1914762
GraemeWed, 19 Feb 2014 08:34:04 +0000http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=19858#comment-1914762Johnston, indeed everyone declared elected, had to be parties as voiding the election voided their seats.
But you've hit on what may be a tricky point of law re costs. The AEC formally won the argument but is the self confessed cause. I'd be surprised if they sought to avoid costs orders against them. It would be unjust for the parties to be out of pocket for offering defences to the petition though it may be that Mead (ALP) and Wang (PUP) may have to bear any extra costs to themselves generated by their 'extra' petitions. The Greens I believe are already out of pocket for their unnecessary but short lived petition.
In a way, the only new law of likely lasting significance may be the costs ruling.
The 'votes-mishandled = prevented from voting' ruling, super technical and artificial as it is, could theoretically apply in other cases of misadventure in close elections. But it would only matter where votes were lost/knicked after the original scrutiny. You could be mischievous and say Hayne's ruling provides an incentive to knick ballots (any old ballots would do) if you know you are losing a very close race...Johnston, indeed everyone declared elected, had to be parties as voiding the election voided their seats.

But you’ve hit on what may be a tricky point of law re costs. The AEC formally won the argument but is the self confessed cause. I’d be surprised if they sought to avoid costs orders against them. It would be unjust for the parties to be out of pocket for offering defences to the petition though it may be that Mead (ALP) and Wang (PUP) may have to bear any extra costs to themselves generated by their ‘extra’ petitions. The Greens I believe are already out of pocket for their unnecessary but short lived petition.

In a way, the only new law of likely lasting significance may be the costs ruling.
The ‘votes-mishandled = prevented from voting’ ruling, super technical and artificial as it is, could theoretically apply in other cases of misadventure in close elections. But it would only matter where votes were lost/knicked after the original scrutiny. You could be mischievous and say Hayne’s ruling provides an incentive to knick ballots (any old ballots would do) if you know you are losing a very close race…

]]>By: pedanthttp://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/02/18/high-court-paves-way-for-fresh-wa-senate-election/comment-page-2/#comment-1914607
pedantWed, 19 Feb 2014 05:53:40 +0000http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=19858#comment-1914607Psephos @ 53: Presumably because the AEC, by seeking to have the election declared void, is disputing the election of all six senators-elect, including Senator Johnston.Psephos @ 53: Presumably because the AEC, by seeking to have the election declared void, is disputing the election of all six senators-elect, including Senator Johnston.
]]>By: Tom the first and besthttp://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/02/18/high-court-paves-way-for-fresh-wa-senate-election/comment-page-2/#comment-1914594
Tom the first and bestWed, 19 Feb 2014 05:41:36 +0000http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=19858#comment-191459453
Because the AEC took all that into account decided he should be a respondent in the case.53

Because the AEC took all that into account decided he should be a respondent in the case.

]]>By: Psephoshttp://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/02/18/high-court-paves-way-for-fresh-wa-senate-election/comment-page-2/#comment-1914548
PsephosWed, 19 Feb 2014 05:09:03 +0000http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=19858#comment-1914548Yes Tom I know all that (rolls eyes). But why does that make him a party to the court case?Yes Tom I know all that (rolls eyes). But why does that make him a party to the court case?
]]>By: Outsiderhttp://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/02/18/high-court-paves-way-for-fresh-wa-senate-election/comment-page-2/#comment-1914485
OutsiderWed, 19 Feb 2014 04:23:54 +0000http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=19858#comment-1914485Pedant. Thank you for drawing that to my attention. In some respects it might make the whole issue of costs orders even more problematic! I was falling into the error of thinking that costs issues would be disposed of in the same way as other civil litigation matters.
I wonder what submissions the AEC will make on that point?
The proceedings certainly arose due to the AEC's stuff up, and that would therefore be a basis for arguing that costs of all directly affected parties should, in fairness, be met by the AEC. I shouldn't allow myself to be so distracted by such esoterica but I will await Hayne J's further orders with interest!!Pedant. Thank you for drawing that to my attention. In some respects it might make the whole issue of costs orders even more problematic! I was falling into the error of thinking that costs issues would be disposed of in the same way as other civil litigation matters.

I wonder what submissions the AEC will make on that point?

The proceedings certainly arose due to the AEC’s stuff up, and that would therefore be a basis for arguing that costs of all directly affected parties should, in fairness, be met by the AEC. I shouldn’t allow myself to be so distracted by such esoterica but I will await Hayne J’s further orders with interest!!

]]>By: Tom the first and besthttp://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/02/18/high-court-paves-way-for-fresh-wa-senate-election/comment-page-2/#comment-1914482
Tom the first and bestWed, 19 Feb 2014 04:23:10 +0000http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=19858#comment-191448249
Because, since the Senate switched to PR in 1949 and especially since Senate by-elections were abolished by the 1977 referendum, it would be out of place to order only the Senate seats in dispute go back to the polls and as such that means voiding of the election of the 4 Senators whose election is not in doubt and thus they are directly effected by the result a should be parties.49

Because, since the Senate switched to PR in 1949 and especially since Senate by-elections were abolished by the 1977 referendum, it would be out of place to order only the Senate seats in dispute go back to the polls and as such that means voiding of the election of the 4 Senators whose election is not in doubt and thus they are directly effected by the result a should be parties.

]]>By: pedanthttp://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/02/18/high-court-paves-way-for-fresh-wa-senate-election/comment-page-1/#comment-1914475
pedantWed, 19 Feb 2014 04:07:46 +0000http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=19858#comment-1914475Outsider @ 48: I would have thought that this is an almost perfect example of a case in which the Commonwealth should be ordered to pay costs, as permitted by subsection 360(4) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918. But for the stuff up by the AEC, a Commonwealth statutory agency, the petitions (at least in their present form) would not have been necessary.Outsider @ 48: I would have thought that this is an almost perfect example of a case in which the Commonwealth should be ordered to pay costs, as permitted by subsection 360(4) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918. But for the stuff up by the AEC, a Commonwealth statutory agency, the petitions (at least in their present form) would not have been necessary.
]]>By: Psephoshttp://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2014/02/18/high-court-paves-way-for-fresh-wa-senate-election/comment-page-1/#comment-1914464
PsephosWed, 19 Feb 2014 03:57:40 +0000http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/?p=19858#comment-1914464Why was Johnston a party at all since his position was not in dispute?Why was Johnston a party at all since his position was not in dispute?
]]>